Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 207 posts

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#181

Post by Melchizedek »

simonhorlick wrote: post #6

X is turning into a wasteland of angry people and bots. Bluesky is much more refreshing, similar to the old twitter.

Pffft. X is by far the most important social network for people and things that matter. So not your vacation photos on Facebook or some influencer posting semi-nude pics on Instagram. It has only gotten better since Musk made moderation neutral, as opposed to the previous absurdly one-sided suppression of anything that deviates even slightly from ultra-left Liberal Silicon Valley ideology.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#182

Post by cassianoleal »

Gud wrote: post #166
cassianoleal wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but it wouldn't be subjected to Musk's censorship on Random Website, whereas on Twitter it is.

Yes, but if the government censors it, it’s forbidden on both. Surely you muse see the difference?

Yes, I do. That's precisely my point. It's based on law. Brazil is a democratic country. The law is the will of the people, or at least it is as much as bullshit USA-based representative democracy goes. Still much closer to the will of the people than Musk's personal opinions and whims.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#183

Post by orwin »

mrmlz wrote: post #115
orwin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result will be that speech will be suppressed for 99% of the population and only a select few can talk. If it was a principled position the effects would be 10 times greater but since he compromised himself for money, the effects would be minimal. I've thought about it more. I think the reason why he refused was because it was a public court order, so everyone could see him cooperate. If they did it like Erdoğan…

? Why would it be suppressed for 99%? Yeah its harder to censor people out in the open. FB and Zuck hid it - but i believe he recently said he regretted doing that. I dont see how hiding your motivation and allowing free speech is in fact anti-free-speech. Why do you see it as an attack? You are arguing that brazil has the right to limit free speech and that Elon should comply and censor his platform. That is what th…

It's suppressed for everyone who don't have Starlink or the mean/knowledge to pay for a VPN on their phone.

Only fighting against account deletion when the demand is above-board like in Brazil, and secretly comply when it's hide and you only see side-effect like in Turkey is indeed anti-transparency, as you are announcing to the world: 'Text me and I'll do it, but not in the open'.

Yeah, obviously it isn't a personal attack, I must have been wrong, it was a perfectly good faith argument, so I will respond:

I'm saying that Elon Musk see himself above Brazil court of justice, and act like a supranational power. If an individual thought himself above the law, or will of the people in DDR, I would have been on the wall. My father still has a part of it btw.

I will add that i apologize for the sarcasm but I will let it there, because that's what I would have responded in real life. If you _really_ didn't intend it as a personal attack, you should consider how you communicate with your peers. The first message wasn't any better and close enough to an ad hominem I considered not engaging, but I thought I wasn't clear enough and i needed clarification, so it was a good vehicle. Sorry again if it wasn't a personal attack.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#184

Post by 3cats-in-a-coat »

ldbooth wrote: post #152

I just wish this guy would take the loss and sell twitter and go back to being an uncontroversial tech legend. Mixing with Social media has corrupted every positive thing he has done and maybe will do if he keeps it up at the current pace. People tire of the drama king. If you don't know what I mean.. he said his transgender child is dead to him in a publicly aired interview. That's where this guy is in his personal…

Drama is the only way for him to continue covering up the massive Ponzi that his businesses have evolved into.

Tesla won't last much longer. Their numbers are objectively terrible, and they're puffed up, the truth is even uglier. Boring is losing money fast, X is losing money fast, xAI is losing money fast, NeuraLink is losing a bit slower, but losing. SpaceX is propped up by US govt and Starlink is the only real asset here, and governments around the world won't permit a private company led by a lunatic to have a monopoly on the world's communications, so Elon is really in a VERY BAD NOT GOOD AT ALL situation.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#185

Post by ldbooth »

amy-petrik-214 wrote: post #175
ldbooth wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are overstating enforcement of corporate laws vs. a government censoring an entire nation. Similarly banning X in the US would not be censorship if the company flouted and refused to obey US laws. He is spending many people's money, not just his own. He's human, he can be both a tech legend and a polarizing, drama-magnet of a human being, I just lament him leaning into the latter when the benefit is winning a pis…

No no no no no no. It's not as black and white as "oh they failed to obey US laws" - that is a highly deceptive portrayal of the situation! We are talking about free speech laws. What if the law says "no hate speech, according to a floating definition of hate speech drafted by those with power who are the scions of rightthink" What if the law says "no disinformation, according to the custodians of rightthink and righ…

Your argument is no content moderation by social platforms. Your point is if it's hard, don't do it. Courts and legal interpretations exist for this reason, to parse the grey areas, and in this case they are ruling against Twitter's lack of content moderation.

Free speech doesn't equate to the freedom to spread misinformation, supporting and then organizing an attempted a military coup in Brazil.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#186

Post by Gud »

cassianoleal wrote: post #182
Gud wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but if the government censors it, it’s forbidden on both. Surely you muse see the difference?

Yes, I do. That's precisely my point. It's based on law. Brazil is a democratic country. The law is the will of the people, or at least it is as much as bullshit USA-based representative democracy goes. Still much closer to the will of the people than Musk's personal opinions and whims.

Sorry, but you are completely missing the point.

Have a nice day.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#187

Post by Timon3 »

mike_hearn wrote: post #176
Timon3 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What state were they restored to? If they were accessible, why did they have to be restored? If you're going to argue "a ban doesn't count if it's reversed after a couple of hours", what's the threshold? Could Elon ban people for a week without it counting as a ban? What if it happens repeatedly?

If these accounts were banned due to censorship they'd have stayed banned. There are plenty of accounts that were shut down on Twitter that are still disabled today.

And you know that how exactly? Do you work at Twitter? Are you responsible for banning/restoring accounts?

You're making broad statements and assumptions that don't align with reality. The accounts were banned. You don't know why they were banned or restored.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#188

Post by inemesitaffia »

greesil wrote: post #171
inemesitaffia wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone doesn't know how orbits work, how big space is, or how expensive other satellite services used to be pre starlink. Or how bad it can get with latency. And yes the unreachable people have family in reachable areas that can pay, sometimes the Internet is what keeps them away, since solar and batteries exist See the Marubo for example

You mean me, the aerospace engineer, who has published in this field, doesn't know how satellite constellations, link budgets, astrodynamics, the orbital environment, the systems engineering, and the other minutiae of this, doesn't understand the tradeoffs in building these things? What do you know, in a professional capacity? Tell me you're in this field, or piss off. Tell me how big is space. Like, is it as big as…

I'll ask you an easy question.

There's another LEO provider with around the number of sats you recommend. What's the provider and how much do they charge for fixed use in the USA?

I worked at a cellular Telco serving customers with an ARPU under $20. Also worked at a satellite tech reseller.

These unreachable poor people were my bread and butter.

Your statements show ignorance about the markets, space and other minutae. Piss off.

How much would these better antennas end up costing? Is Rajeev Badyal an idiot?

Frankly unless you're thinking B2B then cell rather than B2C your choices are worse, not better. We have o3b and it's way better than starlink for stability. But there's several $$$$$$ big reasons I can't pop out to a shop and buy a receiver.

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#189

Post by nec4b »

ldbooth wrote: post #168
nec4b wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>I just wish this guy would take the loss and sell twitter and go back to being an uncontroversial tech legend. Why do you care, he is spending his own money. Isn't it more important that we now know Brazil has no rule of law. A single party overtook all the subsystems in the country and now Brazil is in the company of countries like Iran or North Korea regarding X censorship. Eye opening is also how many people wou…

You are overstating enforcement of corporate laws vs. a government censoring an entire nation. Similarly banning X in the US would not be censorship if the company flouted and refused to obey US laws. He is spending many people's money, not just his own. He's human, he can be both a tech legend and a polarizing, drama-magnet of a human being, I just lament him leaning into the latter when the benefit is winning a pis…

>>He is spending many people's money, not just his own.

Whose money not freely given to him is he spending?

Re: Starlink Defies Order to Block X in Brazil

#190

Post by nec4b »

ldbooth wrote: post #185
amy-petrik-214 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No no no no no no. It's not as black and white as "oh they failed to obey US laws" - that is a highly deceptive portrayal of the situation! We are talking about free speech laws. What if the law says "no hate speech, according to a floating definition of hate speech drafted by those with power who are the scions of rightthink" What if the law says "no disinformation, according to the custodians of rightthink and righ…

Your argument is no content moderation by social platforms. Your point is if it's hard, don't do it. Courts and legal interpretations exist for this reason, to parse the grey areas, and in this case they are ruling against Twitter's lack of content moderation. Free speech doesn't equate to the freedom to spread misinformation, supporting and then organizing an attempted a military coup in Brazil.

Do you perhaps have a link to the definition of misinformation. What exactly counts as misinformation? Telling someone a fact you maybe misremembered from a while ago, would that be misinformation and as such punishable?
Post reply on HN